On one day, the president of the United States declared there would be a government shutdown if Congress didn’t come to a decision on an immigration package that secured our borders.
That is that. No deal, no government. “I would love a shutdown” if there’s no deal to build a wall. “Without borders, we don’t have a country,” Donald Trump declared.
The next day, U.S. Senate Democratic and Republican leaders cobbled together a budget deal that funds the government for two years. It’s a bipartisan agreement. Oh, and it doesn’t have any money for the wall the president wants to build across our southern border.
No worries, said the president. He’ll sign it if it gets to his desk.
So, which is it? Does the president want the wall or does he want to fund the government and avoid a shutdown that could occur later this week?
Honestly, I prefer the second version of the president’s current view. I believe he should sign the bill if it clears the House of Representatives, which at the moment is going through a revolt among members of its most conservative members. They hate the bill because it spends too much money and, yes, doesn’t include money for the wall or other border security measures.
They call themselves “fiscal hawks.” They say the Republican Party no longer can claim to be the party of “fiscal responsibility.”
Here’s what I hope happens. The House agrees on the Senate bill, they send it to the White House, the president signs it and then all sides — Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the president — get to work immediately on resolving the issue of immigration.
A viable government needs to proceed without the imminent threat of shutting down.
I am one taxpaying American citizen who is damn tired of this Band-Aid policy of running the government.
Can we just agree to keep the entire federal government functioning and serving all Americans while our representatives do what they were elected to do?
It is called “governing.”